The Supreme Court of Indiana. The Act for the organization of the Su preme Court was enacted May 13, 1852. By its terms the court was made to con sist of four judges; the court to be held in the State House, or, by adjournment, in any other room in the city of Indianapolis. They were authorized to occupy for consul tation any of the rooms of the building in the Governor's Circle, where the present Soldiers' and Sailors' Monument now stands. The two terms, then as now, began respec tively on the fourth Mondays in May and November; and each term consisted of thirty days, and was enlarged by operation of law, "if the business thereof requires.it." For each term, then as now, the judges choose one of their number chief-justice, who presides at their consultations and in court. Each judge takes his turn as chiefjustice. The term of office of each judge begins on the first Monday in January after his election.1 An attorney-general to represent the State was not provided for until 1855. The court was authorized to appoint its own sheriff.2 On the 1 2th day of October, 1852, Sam uel E. Perkins, Andrew Davison, William T. Stuart, and Addison L. Roache were chosen by the electors of the State judges of the Supreme Court over their oppo nents, Charles Dewey, David McDonald, John B. Howe, and Samuel B. Gookins; and they entered upon their duties Jan. %, 1853.. Perkins was Blackford's competi tor for the nomination, and defeated him. He was the only member of the old court who was retained on the bench. Blackford's last opinion was Sloan v. Kingore (3 Ind. 1 The clerks of the Supreme Court have been Daniel Lymmes, 1794-1804; Henry Hurst, 1804-1820; Henry Coburn, 1820-1852; William B. Beach, 1852-1860; John P. Jones, 186o-i864; Lazarus Noble, 1864-1S6S; Theo dore W. McCoy, 1868-1S72; Charles Scholl, 1872-1876; Gabriel Schmuck, 1876-1880; Daniel Royse, 1880-1881; Jonathan W. Gordon, 18S1-18S2; Simon P. Sheerin, 1882-1S86; William T. Noble, 1886-1890; Andrew M. Sweeney, 18902 The State had an attorney general from December, 1821, to 1831, when the office was abolished. His salary was $200.
229
549), delivered Dec. 24, 1852; and Smith's the Terre Haute Drawbridge Company v. Halliday (4. Ind. 36), delivered Jan. 1, 1853, the last day of the old court. Two opin ions were delivered on that day. The first opinions of the new court were delivered Feb. 1, 1853. Stuart delivered three, and the other judges two each. No further opin ions were delivered until the May term of that year. The pay of the judges was only twelve hundred dollars per annum, three hundred dollars lower than it had been at one time for a judge of the old court. The new judges were all Democrats. A new condition of affairs confronted the court. A wave of reform was sweeping over the State, and the new Constitution pro vided for a revision of the laws. The Gen eral Assembly was required to provide for the appointment of three commissioners, whose duty it was "to revise, simplify, and abridge the rules, practice, pleadings, and forms of the courts of justice." They were required to provide " for abolishing the dis tinct forms of action at law now in use, and that justice shall be administered in a uni form mode of pleading without distinction between the law and equity." They were also required " to reduce into a systematic code the general Statute Law of the State," and report the result of their labors to the General Assembly, with " recommendations and suggestions." Walter March, G. W. Carr, and Lucien Barbour were appointed the three commissioners, and reported a Civil Code, May 10, 1852, and a Criminal Code the 17th of the same month. The codes were almost literally adopted as re ported. The model for the Civil Code was the New York Code of Civil Procedure; but the Codes of Kentucky and Iowa were resorted to by the commissioners. The most striking feature of the Civil Code was the abolition of all " distinctions in pleading and practice between actions at law and suits in equity," and the substitu tion of " one form of action for the enforce
